in reality one does not need to know anything about rebirth at all. one can simply practice the dhamma, see through reality bit by bit and eventually enter nibbana never knowing a thing about rebirth being real or not

Actually in the vipassana nanas one of the earlier stages is called paccayapariggahanana , meaning that it is seen that every moment is conditioned by other moments (including kamma). . It is also called kankhavitarana visuddhi ( Escape from all Doubt Purification- one no longer doubts truths like kamma or rebirth)

robertk wrote:Actually in the vipassana nanas one of the earlier stages is called paccayapariggahanana , meaning that it is seen that every moment is conditioned by other moments (including kamma).

I can understand how this is seen to happen moment-by-moment, but what about distant past (prior to one's birth) ?

robertk wrote:It is also called kankhavitarana visuddhi ( Escape from all Doubt Purification- one no longer doubts truths like kamma or rebirth)

1) Does one attains some sort of ESP and can see previous lives?2) Is it direct seeing or inferential?

Thanks,

With best wishes,

Alex

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

robertk wrote:It is seen directly that the previous moments condition this moment and thus rebirth is seen momentarily. One knows that it is impossible for citta to arise without prior cittas conditioning it.

Why can't the first citta of child's life be conditioned by the brain, or cittas of parents?

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

Apparently if the stage of vipassana is reached then the actual conditions are known, and so it would be clear that the parents cittas play no part: they are completely separate.The same regarding any influence from the 'brain'.

HIMy understanding is- That there is no doer (person) of Kamma and hence there is no one to experience it. Just the phenomena flow on.- There is no place called Nibbana and no person to attain it and nothing to be attained!- So ???? who am I and my parents and my thoughts?

Sylvester wrote:Let alone Full Awakening, I doubt if one could even attain Stream Entry without knowing about kamma and rebirth.

Could you clarify what you mean by this?Do you mean that a necessary condition for stream entry is knowing that kamma and rebirth are true? Or is the necessary condition knowing that kamma and rebirth are the Buddha's teachings and then believing them to be true?If the former, does it follow that a would-be stream enterer needs first to obtain the deva eye that sees the arising and passing of beings in accordance with their kammas? Or are there other ways for uninstructed worldlings to reliably know that kamma and rebirth are true?If the latter, how is an unverified faith in kamma and rebirth instrumental in bringing about the arising of the spotless and immaculate eye of Dhamma (the sine qua non of stream entry attainment)? What role does faith of this type play in this event?

robertk wrote:Actually in the vipassana nanas one of the earlier stages is called paccayapariggahanana , meaning that it is seen that every moment is conditioned by other moments (including kamma). . It is also called kankhavitarana visuddhi ( Escape from all Doubt Purification- one no longer doubts truths like kamma or rebirth)

Hi robertk

Can you point to a sutta reference that supports this claim?

robertk wrote:one no longer doubts truths like kamma or rebirth

Are you aware that the doubt hindrance (vicikicchā), as the Buddha taught it, is specifically about wholesome & unwholesome states (dhammas) and their causes, in the sense of the four noble truths, which doesn't have to include just any dogma or view that is considered 'Buddhist'?

Are you aware that even Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi (who is a firm believer in rebirth) implies kamma and rebirth are an ethical teaching?:

The Buddha himself does not try to found ethics on the ideas of kamma and rebirth, but uses a purely naturalistic type of moral reasoning that does not presuppose personal survival or the working of kamma. - Bhikkhu Bodhi in 'Does rebirth make sense?'

are there other ways for uninstructed worldlings to reliably know that kamma and rebirth are true?

That is what the first post in this thread explains.

Okay, but could I ask you to say a little more on this topic. You stated: "Actually in the vipassana nanas one of the earlier stages is called paccayapariggahanana, meaning that it is seen that every moment is conditioned by other moments (including kamma)."

Now presumably in the moment a person gets to paccayapariggahanana she doesn't literally see EVERY moment in that particular moment, right? So would it be correct to say that the epistemic status of her new-found knowledge is inferential? In other words, at paccayapariggahanana she sees with insight dhamma-x conditioning the arising of dhamma-y, and then she extrapolates to conclude that every arising of a y is conditioned by an x.

Or are you saying that there is no inferring here at all, but that a knowledge of the universal applicability of what the person sees is in fact intrinsic to paccayapariggahanana, i.e. the moment she sees with insight an instance of x conditioning y she infallibly knows that all y's arise from x's?

If the former, how might her inference be defended against the charge of being simply a bloated conclusion?If the latter, how can it be reconciled with the Abhidhamma idea that in one moment all you've got is one citta, along with a bundle of cetasikas, cognizing one object? That is, if paccayapariggahanana is an insight knowledge that that takes as its object a particular relationship between two dhammas, it cannot (on the Abhidhamma's premises) simultaneously take as its object the universality of this relationship.

After stream entry there is no more doubt about the dhamma, including rebirth and kamma, because one important aspect of stream entry is understanding how the process of rebirth occurs. So full faith in rebirth & kamma and stream entry are sort of at the same moment. And attaining nibbana can't happen without knowing about those things; partly it is those things that drive towards nibbana.

reflection wrote:After stream entry there is no more doubt about the dhamma, including rebirth and kamma, because one important aspect of stream entry is understanding how the process of rebirth occurs.

Is that what the texts actually say, or are you offering your personal perspective here?

So full faith in rebirth & kamma and stream entry are sort of at the same moment.

If we're doing Classical Theravada here, then I don't think it makes much sense to say that two things "are sort of at the same moment". Either they're simultaneous in their arising and ceasing, like a citta with its cetasikas, or they overlap in time but exhibit different durations, like a citta with certain rupas, or they arise at totally different times.So let's leave out the "sort of" and simply say "faith in rebirth & kamma and stream entry arise at the same moment."But though the sentence is now intelligible, what it asserts seems to be at odds with Theravada teaching. Stream-entry according to the Abhidhamma is the arising of a noble path citta. Since this citta has Nibbana as its object, it can't also be taking the topic of kamma and rebirth as its object. Do you agree?

And attaining nibbana can't happen without knowing about those things; partly it is those things that drive towards nibbana.

Do you mean that accepting them as true and reflecting upon them gives rise to a sense of urgency (samvega) and that the latter then provides the impetus that drives one towards Nibbana?If that is what you mean, what about a case where samvega is generated by something other than faith in (or knowledge about) kamma and rebirth? I mean the texts give us some lengthy lists of samvega-conducive thoughts, most of them having nothing to do with kamma and rebirth. Would you say in these cases that samvega generated by these things is insufficient? That only samvega generated by thinking about kamma and rebirth will deliver the goods? Or do you mean something else?

I see it in the texts. For example: "one who sees the dhamma sees dependent origination" and how stream entry removes doubt.

But of course I don't know what may be sufficient for everybody. That'll differ per person. It's like those guidelines indicating how much to eat per day. Some people need more of particular things, some need less. Likewise, some may need to remind themselves of rebirth to generate effort, while others don't or not that much. But intertwined in seeing the four noble truths is how craving leads to rebirth, so at least that'll be an extra push.

Main thing is we indeed keep generating effort through whatever means. I also think to keep investigating rebirth will be beneficial.

Dear Mr GrimmYou are clearly well-studied in Dhamma, and insightful to boot. I can certainly give some replies to your questions but seriously I think you could do just as well.That being said I will add something as time permits in a day or tworobert

are there other ways for uninstructed worldlings to reliably know that kamma and rebirth are true?

That is what the first post in this thread explains.

Okay, but could I ask you to say a little more on this topic. You stated: "Actually in the vipassana nanas one of the earlier stages is called paccayapariggahanana, meaning that it is seen that every moment is conditioned by other moments (including kamma)."

Now presumably in the moment a person gets to paccayapariggahanana she doesn't literally see EVERY moment in that particular moment, right? So would it be correct to say that the epistemic status of her new-found knowledge is inferential? In other words, at paccayapariggahanana she sees with insight dhamma-x conditioning the arising of dhamma-y, and then she extrapolates to conclude that every arising of a y is conditioned by an x.

Or are you saying that there is no inferring here at all, but that a knowledge of the universal applicability of what the person sees is in fact intrinsic to paccayapariggahanana, i.e. the moment she sees with insight an instance of x conditioning y she infallibly knows that all y's arise from x's?

If the former, how might her inference be defended against the charge of being simply a bloated conclusion??

Great questions that would even tax the ancients, I presume.The vipassana nanas, as I think you know, are the product of deep aand deepening wisdom, uncontrollable, and unstoppable if wisdom is developed. But they occur in flashedsof mindoor processes that clearly distinguish very precisely nama from rupa until even the causes and effects of nama and rupa are discerned. It is not like usual moments of daily life, it is irreversible direct seeing that there is only nama and rupa, no self.Yet even with these profound moments where this seemingly solid world is overturned is only a glimpse into kamma and result- compared to what a Buddha knows:

Vis (section on purification by overcoming doubt)

.17. The succession of kamma and its result in the twelve classes of kamma isclear in its true nature only to the Buddhas’ “knowledge of kamma and itsresult,” which knowledge is not shared by disciples.6 But the succession ofkamma and its result can be known in part by one practicing insight.

So by seeeing directly, so profoundly, although weakly , the actual elemental conditions, all doubt about past and future is uprooted:

18. When he has thus seen by means of the round of kamma and the round ofkamma-result how mentality-materiality’s occurrence is due to a condition, hesees that as now, so in the past, its occurrence was due to a condition by meansof the round of kamma and the round of kamma-result, and that in the future itsoccurrence will be due to a condition by means of the round of kamma and theround of kamma-result.

Yet it must be admitted that inference plays its part in the sense that one who is not a Buddha cannot know past moment trillions of aeons ago, nor aeons ahead in the future. Yet the confidence in Dhamma and conditionality is deeper , for the one who sees this than even for one skilled in samatha who can see past lives.

The one who sees past lives- due to true samatha- might still wonder if before the period of time, perhaps millions of lives ago, that he has access to, there was some God or evolution, or big bang that started it all. His doubt is not fully removed .

The vipassana adept has seen the conditionality too directly, he knows that there is no God or chance occurnece behind the arising of becoming:

Vis> In all kinds of becoming, generation, destiny, station, and abode there appearsonly mentality-materiality, which occurs by means of linking of cause with fruit.He sees no doer over and above the doing, no experiencer of the result over andabove the occurrence of the result. But he sees clearly with right understandingthat the wise say “doer” when there is doing and “experiencer” when there isexperiencing simply as a mode of common usage.20. Hence the Ancients said:There is no doer of a deedOr one who reaps the deed’s result;Phenomena alone flow on—No other view than this is right.And so, while kamma and resultThus causally maintain their round,As seed and tree succeed in turn,No first beginning can be shown.Nor in the future round of births

Are you aware that the doubt hindrance (vicikicchā), as the Buddha taught it, is specifically about wholesome & unwholesome states (dhammas) and their causes, in the sense of the four noble truths, which doesn't have to include just any dogma or view that is considered 'Buddhist'?

:

"Monks I know not of any other single thing so greatly to be blamedas perverted view. Perverted views at their worst are greatly to beblamed". Anguttara Nikaya 1,17,10. Chapter XVIII Makkhali (page 29gradual sayings vol.I)The worst type of unwholesome state is that associated with wrong view.With wrong view there will be no eightfold path - viz the four noble truths.

Over and over, I read in suttas that upon arahantship, one knows that "birth is destroyed, done is what had to be done, the holy life has been fulfilled, there is nothing further here" (for this world). The notion of rebirth in accordance with kamma seems to pervade the suttas. Why exult that "birth has been destroyed" unless you knew that, ordinarily, you were headed for rebirth?

robertk wrote:"Monks I know not of any other single thing so greatly to be blamedas perverted view. Perverted views at their worst are greatly to beblamed". Anguttara Nikaya 1,17,10. Chapter XVIII Makkhali (page 29gradual sayings vol.I)The worst type of unwholesome state is that associated with wrong view.With wrong view there will be no eightfold path - viz the four noble truths.

Thanks robertk, but that doesn't answer my question. I've never denied any of those things that are listed under wrong view (miccha-ditthi):

And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously (mentally) reborn beings (sattā opapātikā); no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view. - M 117

Regarding the doubt hindrance (vicikicchā) you addressed earlier when you said "one no longer doubts truths like kamma or rebirth", the Buddha said doubt falls away at stream-entry:

"Monks, there are these six rewards in realizing the fruit of stream-entry. Which six? One is certain of the true Dhamma. One is not subject to falling back. There is no suffering over what has had a limit placed on it. One is endowed with uncommon knowledge. One rightly sees cause, along with causally-originated phenomena.

"These are the six rewards in realizing the fruit of stream-entry." - AN 6.97

What is 'true' or 'uncommon knowledge' according to the Buddha?

"Upali, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities do not lead to utter disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, nor to Unbinding': You may categorically hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.'

"As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to utter disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding': You may categorically hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'" - AN 7.79

Nina van Gorkom said regarding the doubt hindrance (vicikicchā):

The reality of vicikicchā is not the same as what we mean by doubt in conventional language. Vicikicchā is not doubt about someone's name or about the weather. Vicikicchā is doubt about realities, about nāma and rūpa, about cause and result, about the four noble Truths, about the “Dependant Origination” - Nina van Gorkom

Happy (certain and stable in the Dhamma) New Year

Last edited by nibbuti on Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:24 pm, edited 5 times in total.